Why have handicaps...

[Mark Pearce]

Since pros don't keep handicaps how do you allocate strokes when playing against a pro?  I am a 10 handicap (index of 8.5) - if I were to play Tiger would I only get 10 strokes?

That doesn't seem fair as he should have the lowest handicap in the world.  I found a couple of articles on the web over the last few years that estimate his handicap of +8 in 2003 and +10 in 2000.

Could a pro choose to just play off of scratch?

So what are you saying?  Because pros don't have handicaps they shouldn't be made to give shots?  I'd have thought playing off scratch was appropriate.  If I got the chance to paly against Tiger I'm not sure I'd be worrying too much about only getting 11 shots.

[Jim Nugent]

You can handicap other sports.  Take hoops, and say two teams are playing to 15.  The stronger team can spot the weaker one any number of points.  So while Team A starts from zero, and must score 15 to win, Team B starts from 7, and only must score 8.  

Lots of other sports can work the same way.  

[Garland Bayley]

Since pros don't keep handicaps how do you allocate strokes when playing against a pro?  I am a 10 handicap (index of 8.5) - if I were to play Tiger would I only get 10 strokes?

That doesn't seem fair as he should have the lowest handicap in the world.  I found a couple of articles on the web over the last few years that estimate his handicap of +8 in 2003 and +10 in 2000.

Could a pro choose to just play off of scratch?

The pros tournament scores are available publicly, the course ratings are available publicly, the handicap formula is on the USGA website. you can calculate the handicap. If it turned out to be plus 5, you get 15 strokes.
In 100 matches, expect him to win perhaps 52 to 53 times.

[Jerry Kluger]

Many golf courses being built today are within communities, and many of those communities are geared toward retirees.  I would suggest that a large percentage of those retirees had never played golf, or perhaps, never played regularly. For the first time they are carrying official handicaps and they aren't going to be very low.  

You also need to bring in the type of course being built today.  Many people judge the quality of courses based upon their rating and slope, especially slope.  It is no secret that slope becomes a more siginificant factor as handicaps go up. So they are building courses with higher slope ratings at communities where a large percentage of the golfers will be higher handicap players.  

The end result is that this is one reason why handicaps go up.    

[Alan Carter]

All in all the handicap system works pretty well.  

You cannot relate a handicap system to many sports.  The example given of bowling I can understand.  It is an individual sport where numbers are used to calcualte a final score.  Those numbers can be analized and a specific handicap can be given to anyone.  The example of hoops does not have a chance.  You would end up spending four or five games coming up with what the "starting spread" should be and I believe even after that the better team would still win most of the time if they stepped it up at all.  Not fun for anyone to play to 15 and start at 14-0.  

The pro thing is an interesting issue.  Typically, most professionals play off of scratch, but if that pro is better than a scratch most memberships will request that the pro play off a handicap that is lower than scratch.  My membership forces me to keep a handicap and I'm okay with that.  The system works and it is fair to all concerned.  If you play to your ability and your opponent does the same, it will make for a great match.  Whether it is a five against a twenty-five the system works.  You should here the discussions when a pro plays against another pro and there needs to be shots involved.  The end result is that everyone should get what is coming to them professional or not.  I'd love to take my 6 shots from Tiger with his plus 8 handicap.

When I play against most "honest" (meaning they put in all of their scores) amateurs, the fact that I keep in my back pocket is that most player's handicaps are usually slightly lower than they should be.  If I simply make them to play by the proper rules of golf I usually end up getting an extra shot or two.  How many times does a player hit a ball into the trees and say "oh, we'll find that" and end up not finding it and simply dropping a ball beside the trees and play it as a lateral or with no penalty at all.  There is also the intimidation factor that I can usually count on for the first few holes to help me out.  If all fails and I am losing on the back nine, I can always resort to a couple of bad swing tips to throw my opponent for a loop.  (Just kidding, I would never such a thing)

The reasons for the lack of improvement over the years have been mentioned by many others on this thread, but the biggest reason is the revolving door of players.  There is always roughly the same percentage of new, aging, core, casual and many other categories of golfers that are entering the game and leaving the game.  It is this total group that form the average handicap.  One other big reason for the lack of improvement is the vast amount of golf information that any golfer is subjected to.  Too much information is not always a good thing.  Thank you Golf Channel, countless magazines, golf schools, infomercial gadgets and who knows how many more.  All of this keeps increasing the interested in the game, but thankfully helps to keep all of us golf professionals busy trying to sort out all of this confusion that ends up in someone's head.

Golf is a wonderful game........    

[Wayne_Kozun]

So what are you saying?  Because pros don't have handicaps they shouldn't be made to give shots?  I'd have thought playing off scratch was appropriate.  If I got the chance to paly against Tiger I'm not sure I'd be worrying too much about only getting 11 shots.

I am asking if pros get the option of playing off of scratch or if they have to play off of a handicap.  Would it be fair for Tiger to receive strokes from a top flight amateur who has a cap of +2?  I don't think so!

[Wayne_Kozun]

The pros tournament scores are available publicly, the course ratings are available publicly, the handicap formula is on the USGA website. you can calculate the handicap. If it turned out to be plus 5, you get 15 strokes.
In 100 matches, expect him to win perhaps 52 to 53 times.

I would bet that the pro would win more often than 52-53 because I would bet that a pros score has less variance than a regular golfer.  By definition you will only shoot lower than your handicap 25% of the time (assuming the mean and median are equal).  If you were a totally consistent golfer and shot the same score every time you would always shoot your cap.  

Let's look at an example - I have a cap of 10 on my home course.  Let's say I am playing a match against Mr. Steady who also has a cap of 10 but always shoots 81 (my course is a par 71).  He gets no strokes but he will beat me 75% of the time.  I would bet that pros are more like Mr. Steady than your average golfer.

I believe there has been some discussion at the USGA about adjusting your handicap for variance (aka standard deviation) but they haven't figured out a good way to do it yet.

[JSlonis]

I believe there has been some talk on this subject, but had a tough time with the search.

I was recently speaking with a well respected golf professional and he proposed the question;
Why haven't handicaps improved over the years?

He believes it’s the teachers. He believes that Golf Professionals have simply been teaching, and studying the wrong things. I find this very interesting and partially agree with this hypothesis.

So do you guys agree, disagree?

Could it have something to do with the architecture, time, maybe even money (for equipment, lessons, amount of play etc.)?

I don't think the Professionals are teaching the wrong things.  The basic fundamentals of the golf swing have not changed all that much.  Your average golfer has poor fundamentals, he also doesn't take lessons.  I do agree however that the Professionals do not spend enough time with the everyday lesson taking member stressing the importance of the short game.  Everyone wants a quick swing fix, and the Pro's make a quick $$ giving them one.

I believe the answers are quite simply really.

*The vast majority of golfers don't take enough lessons.

*The golfers that supposedly "practice", do so incorrectly.

*The Short Game- where most golfers can save the greatest number of shots, is rarely if ever worked on.

*Technolgical advancements help far fewer players than the Manufacturer's would have you believe.  A player must possess some consistent level of skill/ability to benefit properly.

*A lot of people just play to play, they don't seem to worry about ever improving.  I see it everyday at my club.  I'll never understand this mentality, but I see it a lot.

*A lot of people talk about improving their game but never take the steps or spend the time it takes to get better.  I'm sure this could also be true for many other facets of life.

[Jim Sweeney]

Mike Young:

An interesting thesis, but 33-1 refers to the committee in charge of a competition, not the handicap committee. I f the golfers had scores shot in acoordance with the rules of golf they should be returned for handicap purposes.



The USGA has done quite a bit of research on stagnant hadicap levels and the answer is really simple- the growth if the game and new golfers entering the handicap system.

I would hypothesize that if there were a large reduction in the number of golfers- say, 33%- the average handicap would go down becuase there would be a higher percentage of experienced golfers.

Instruction (or poor instruction) is an issue, but I've read the statements about handicap levels on the inside cover of almostevery book being sold by some "guru," so I have my suspicions about why they keep bringing it up- in other words, no instructor has the magic secret- it's mostly repackaging of the same information.

Jordan:

Don't play with this guy. He's trying to take advantage of you.  Anyone who tries to shame you into relinquishing the strokes to which you are entitled probably should be dropped from your golf buddy list.


ALl club pros should have a handicap calculated under the USGA system. At the very least it is a gesture toward the membership. I've met more than one, however, whio would not keep a handicap out of embarassment that his members would find out that he wasn't really much of a player.

[Mike_Young]

Mike Young:

An interesting thesis, but 33-1 refers to the committee in charge of a competition, not the handicap committee. I f the golfers had scores shot in acoordance with the rules of golf they should be returned for handicap purposes.



The USGA has done quite a bit of research on stagnant hadicap levels and the answer is really simple- the growth if the game and new golfers entering the handicap system.

I would hypothesize that if there were a large reduction in the number of golfers- say, 33%- the average handicap would go down becuase there would be a higher percentage of experienced golfers.

Instruction (or poor instruction) is an issue, but I've read the statements about handicap levels on the inside cover of almostevery book being sold by some "guru," so I have my suspicions about why they keep bringing it up- in other words, no instructor has the magic secret- it's mostly repackaging of the same information.

Jim,
Good to see you last week.
I did not mean to imply the handicap committee.  I was implying as you said that many of these saturday 4 ball nassau matches cannot be played within the rules of golf for the very reason that is stated. They are match play.  For example, Just by watching my partner, who is nearer the hole  putt on possibly the same line for a par so that I may put for a birdie gives me an unfair advantage over another score I may post without that advantage, and the same as for asking which club was played into a green etc.  Or if a ptt of four feet is given so that a partner cannot see the line etc.  I really think the only legitimate handicap scores that can be turned in are individual stropke play scores played under the rules of golf.....BUT I don't think it feasible.....JMO
Mike

[Jim Sweeney]

Mike-

BTW, I think you're lucky to have left before the exam. It was hard! A real wakeup call for me.

I see your point, and I don't disagree. The Handicap Procedures Committee has determined several times when it is better to capture the scores than not. For example, scores made while using preferred lies or electronic measuring devices (before they were allowed at all) are permitted for handicap purposes.

That allows some "slop" into the system , I suppose. But what would you do with someone who always plays preferred lies, or always uses a rangefinder? Deny them a USGA handicap? I know you could say the same thing about, say, an non conforming chipper or a .085 COR driver- how much difference could it make- but I don't get to make the rules.

Anyway, whenever you're headed to the 'nati, please give a call.

JIm